Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Information Architects (IARC): E-Commerce & EIP -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jeffrey S. Mitchell who wrote (3775)	12/19/1997 12:49:00 AM
From: Josef Svejk	Respond to of 10786

Humbly report, Jeff, and toilet paper, and underware. Svejk (GL-15 applies: digiserve.com )

To: Jeffrey S. Mitchell who wrote (3775)	12/19/1997 5:53:00 PM
From: GoodQ	Respond to of 10786

Jeff: Here are some reasons I can see why Y2K work can go beyond year 2000: 1. The so call fix before year 2000 are either done by people/tool which don't work; did not have time to test, or test correctly; Therefore, It will have to be redone again. 2. Many company underestimate the scope of the work and the systems needed fixing. Some systems will remain unfixed and be discovered in year 2000. 3. Many company will have to do a quick patch including using techniques like windowing which will allow their system to function post year 2000 due to their late start in addressing Y2K issues. After year 2000, they will want to do a longer term fix. IMHO. GQ

To: Jeffrey S. Mitchell who wrote (3775)	12/20/1997 4:10:00 PM
From: ZOID	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10786

Jeff: You had to have seen Wed, Dec 16th USA today article on state and federal government progress report on Y2k. I interpreted the article as basically an admission that all but "critical systems" will get any attention and have a shot at being compliant before 12/31/99. Also, quote from SAIC exective on status of progess. Nice to know ALYD has existing relationship with this large information services provider to the government. Also, if in the worst scenario they admit critical system failure in a number of departments, could ALYD, CPWR, DDIM and others be "nationalized" under some "war powers" act to save our butts? Best Regards